Page 64 - British Inquiry into Loss of RMS Titanic Day 19 - 22
P. 64
The Commissioner: I should like to know what the boat accommodation on these large American liners is - I mean liners sailing under the American flag. Mr. Laing: That may be ascertained - you can easily ascertain it, Mr. Wilding. The Witness: The White Star Line could easily ascertain it. The Commissioner: With reference to those figures at the bottom of the paper you have handed to me, I want to know what the tonnage of the “President Lincoln” was. Mr. Laing - To the Witness: Can you tell me the gross tonnage of the “President Lincoln” and the “President Grant”? 20896-7. (The Commissioner.) Was it more than 10,000 tons? - It is about 16,000 or 17,000 tons. 20898. Now, you have put at the bottom of this paper “British Board of Trade require 9,625 cubic feet.” Does that mean the number required for a boat of 10,000 tons? - 10,000 tons and upwards. 20899. When you give the cubic feet required by the American law and the German law, you are giving the cubic feet required for vessels of the size of the “President Lincoln” and the “President Grant”? - Quite right, my Lord. 20900. Very much in excess of the 10,000 feet at which the British Board of Trade requirements stop? - Yes. The Commissioner: It does not help very much. 20901. (Mr. Laing.) No; I only thought it might be interesting to compare the three countries. (To the Witness.) With regard to the two lines, the P. and O. and the Royal Mail, which carry boats for all their passengers, those lines do not carry steerage passengers at all? - The Royal Mail carry a limited number. 20902. But it is limited? - Yes 20903. And the P. and O. carry none at all, I think? - None at all. 20904. With regard to the pumping arrangements of the “Titanic,” were they all put upon a plan and submitted to the Board of Trade? - They were. 20905. And were they approved? - They were. 20906. With regard to the bulkhead plating, you gave us some figures which show, I think, that the bulkhead plating is in excess of Lloyd’s? - I gave them in cross-examination. 20907. Can you make the same statement about the stiffening? - Yes, it was still more in excess - about 50 percent in strength in excess of Lloyd’s requirements. 20908. And in excess of the Bulkhead Committee’s recommendations? - So far as the latter extend. 20909. In excess of them? - Yes, considerably in excess. 20910. Now, to the number of watertight bulkheads for a vessel of the size of the “Titanic,” Lloyd’s Rules do not extend, I think? - Not quite; 680 feet is their largest. 20911. Applying proportionately the difference in length between 680 feet and the “Titanic’s” length, how many watertight bulkheads would Lloyd’s requirements want? - As far as one can tell, 13. 20912. And how many had the “Titanic”? - Fifteen. 20913. And with regard to the Board of Trade regulations, so far as those regulations are in writing, how many do they require? - Four. 20914. There was a question cropped up in the evidence about explosions. Can you give us any information as to whether these boilers were likely to explode or not? - I should think it was very unlikely. There are very few cases, I believe, of boilers examined in ships after they have been flooded which have exploded. Of course, when sea water reaches a hot boiler there is a great cloud of steam which might give a certain impression of explosion. 20915. Some witnesses spoke of noises, and some of them suggested that the noises might
   59   60   61   62   63   64   65   66   67   68   69